Party Discipline
In light of the Republican and Democratic National Conventions, one could do worse than recall the words of George Washington in his farewell address of 17 September, 1796:
"Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
"This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy.
"It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection ...
"There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchial cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."
I've never been able to understand how anyone could be a votary of a party; where what is at best a means becomes an end in itself - and usually a dead-end.
August 31, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834205dc953ef00e5501e3e478833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Party Discipline:
Comments
Washington makes a good point. At the same time, it's not necessarily better or more intellectually honest to be undecided than to be wedded to a party regardless of its platform. I'm sure you would not dispute that irrational voting behavior would continue to occur even if parties were abolished.
And how does Zell Miller fit into this? ;-)
Posted by: Aaron at Sep 2, 2004 1:56:16 PM
Aaron,
Agreed - I didn't mean to eulogize "independents." My ire was directed against votaries - that is to say, enthusiasts - of parties.
I'll concede, too, that there's an understandable motive to join a party: banding together with those who share one's values. Still, I think that allowing the means to transmute into an end-in-itself is a perennial danger, exemplified in the loyal "party man."
As to crazy Miller - I must confess that I haven't a clue what to make of him. Yep, I'm clueless once again :)
Posted by: Paul Craddick at Sep 2, 2004 6:14:28 PM
Perhaps it has to do with the surname. Didn't more or less the same thing happen to Dennis Miller over the past three years? (A purported change of political heart, followed by increasingly unreasoned and angry statements, culminating with a meltdown on national television which caused even staunch Republicans to avert their eyes?)
Posted by: Aaron at Sep 3, 2004 9:58:51 AM